The use of paint stripes on road surfaces is the accepted method to indicate vehicle lanes, crossing lanes, parking areas and numerous other indicators. Various pavement marking techniques are known, including the use of traffic paint, thermoplastic, epoxy paint and preformed tapes. Common pavement surfaces are asphalt and concrete. Most pavement marking systems are intended to be as durable and permanent as possible, and resistant to weathering and wear from traffic.
The removal of such striping is typically required when the road is to be resurfaced or if the indication is to be changed. The removal of such stripes is typically performed by use of abrasive wheels, grinding teeth, or the blasting of abrasive particles against the material to be removed. The use of these carbide teeth and grinding wheels results in an undesirable trench or groove in the road.
For example, paint, when used for roadway marking, penetrates into the pavement, perhaps ⅛-⅜ inch, so that mere surface removal of the paint is not sufficient to remove the marking. For example, a pavement marking removal technique that uses abrasive wheels or teeth can create excessive heat which may be suitable for removing painted markings but can melt thermoplastic materials causing equipment to gum up, by reconstituting the thermoplastic.
Current pavement marking removal machines typically employ various forms of cutting devices to remove the marking material, as well as a portion of the underlying layer of pavement material, for example, ⅛-⅜ inch, in order to effectively remove painted lines, including paint which has penetrated the porous pavement. A common type of machine employed for removing pavement marking is known as a “Road Pro” grinder manufactured by Dickson Industries, Inc., in Dickson U.S. Pat. No. 5,236,278. This type of machine employs parallel passive shafts that extend between circular rotating end plates. Hardened steel star wheels are carried on the parallel passive shafts, and these star wheels strike and abrade the pavement surface.
Another approach to pavement marking removal is the use of diamond saw blades arranged to make a dado cut. Still other types of machines use grinders or shot blast as described in Patent Registrations U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,753,052; 4,376,358; 3,900,969; 4,336,671; 3,977,128 and 4,377,924.
NLB Corporation markets a high pressure water jet system for removing paint from pavement under the name “StarJet”. The water jet system includes a blast head frame mounted on an attachment to the front bumper of a prime-mover truck. Casters support the frame for movement over the pavement and the path of the blast head is controlled by the driver steering the truck. Because of the position of the driver and the cab body of the prime-mover, it is difficult to see the blast head's position with regard to the stripes on the pavement. Any vision at all requires the driver to lean out of the driver's side window resulting in fatigue and other non ergonomically efficient factors. Positioning the head to the passenger side is performed manually with some difficulty and greatly complicating the driver's ability to view the blast path. The driver must now position himself in an almost upright standing position. Further, due to the length of the extension holding the blast head, the angular off-set, and the swivel of the casters, the movement of the wheel of the truck is not directly related to the path of the blast head.
NLB Corporation also has another system marketed under the mark “StripeJet”, that is a self propelled tractor with a blast head on the front of the tractor. The blast head has a shroud and high pressure inlet with a vacuum recovery.
Another stripe removal system is marketed by the Blasters Corporation which is mounted on a truck similar to the “StarJet” device. Another model appears to be a self-powered four wheeled tractor, similar to a grass mower, which supports a driver and is connected to the prime-mover by high pressure lines for delivery of high pressure water to a blast head. The blast head is on the front of the tractor.
The problem with the prior art is the inability to place an operator close to the material removal site by use of a device that has over-all dimensions that allow for easy transfer sideways on a truck or trailer having a width less than 8′6″.